IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-10846 Conference Calendar

MICHAEL R. REDLICH,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

DOERNER, SAUNDERS, DANIEL, & ANDERSON, L.L.P.,

Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:02-CV-1344-G -------------------- February 19, 2003 Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Michael Redlich appeals from the district court’s dismissal

of his complaint alleging claims of employment termination and

obstruction of justice. The district court dismissed Redlich’s

complaint for failure to amend his complaint to include a

statement of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to FED. R.

CIV. P. 8(a).

Redlich has not challenged in this court the district

court’s reasons for dismissing his complaint. Accordingly, it is

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 02-10846 -2-

as if Redlich had not appealed the judgment. See Brinkmann v.

Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner,

(5th Cir.

1987). Redlich has filed a motion to supplement his original

brief; however, the proposed supplemental brief is merely a

continuation of the merits of his complaint and fails to address

the only appealable issue. See

The motion is DENIED.

Redlich’s appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous.

See Howard v. King,

(5th Cir. 1983). Because

the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; ALL OUTSTANDING MOTIONS ARE

DENIED.